The price bump carries the implication that UFC 168 is not just a great pay-per-view event, it’s more valuable than every single UFC show that came before it. But is it? Let’s take a quick look at the pay-per-view lineup — i.e., the five fights they’re asking you to pay for:

To me, we’re talking about three big fights. The shocking ending of Silva vs. Weidman 1 gives their rematch a great narrative (horrible marketing aside), and it’s safe to say that most UFC fans are curious to see how the sequel will turn out. Rousey vs. Tate is compelling simply because allRonda Rousey appearances are compelling, but there’s nothing to suggest that her second meeting with Miesha won’t end in another first-round armbar. And Barnett vs. Browne? Yep, I’m on board for that.

Beyond that, we have two solid contender fights that you could find on any other UFC main card. This kind of arrangement would place UFC 168 in line with past mega-shows like UFC 92 and UFC 100, which also followed the “two huge fights, one really good fight, two pretty decent fights” format. The difference is, the UFC never tried to jack up the prices of those shows, and there’s a reason for that. In 2008-2009, a UFC card with two big-name title fights was a special occasion. These days, it’s a ultra-rare fluke — and this might be the last time you see it.